Re: Code of Conduct plan

On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 12:06 -0400, James Keener wrote:
> Do we need a code of conduct like this, or so we need a more general
> dispute resolution process? Something that is public and aimed at
> mediating disputes (even ones about bad conduct) and removing repeat
> offenders. To be honest, larger issues of harassment should be handled
> by the police.
>
> A code of conduct is basically "be excellent to each other", but what
> that means is never going to be well codified in a document anyone can
> produce. It's why we have a judiciary in the "real world".
>
> I don't participate too much here, but I've never see a group
> implement a code of conduct go well. I'm a fairly socially liberal
> person, but have been told in one group that my views as a cis,
> hetero, white, middle class make aren't welcome in discussions about
> getting more women or minorities to participate. Specifically there
> was a discussion in that group about how since women often bare the
> burden of child care, even when both partners work, that side projects
> as a hiring criteria are sexist. I mentioned that as an involved
> father I also find little time to work on side projects and that the
> issue is more about those with kids than specifically women and was
> essentially run out of the group.
>
> Another time, same group, someone was discussing guns, and someone
> else said that this kind of discussion is why women don't participate
> much. I mentioned that I know more women who own guns, hunt, and
> target shoot than I do men who do that. I was again told to shut up
> and banded for a few days when I pressed as to why a not-male-centric
> discussion was being censored in the name of sexism and fairness.
>
> How will this CoC handle these situation? I obviously offended people
> and had no intention of doing so. I was also told that the
> moderators/CoC commitee would act fairly, and I obviously believe I
> was mistreated by them. Forgive me for not believing in the
> benevolence of the governors.
>

i think that's much broader problem of CoC that anyone would like to
admit.

but before i go further, let me introduce context of my personal view.
i'm great fan of postgresql (although somewhat outside of my real work,
i use it a lot for work and hobby) and that community, which i find
really great.
i wouldn't describe myself as an active community member, i'm mostly
lurking (sometimes with significant delay) learning even more from other
people's problems and solutions, and at times when i could be of help to
someone it's too late (due to significant delays in reading).
as of CoC, i would say i really do not care that much and it does not
change my life a bit. but...
there's always a "but".
i personally hate formalizing everything for the idea of having all
formalized.

CoC in itself is political thing, for enforcing political correctness in
many social, cultural, geographical, political, religious, intimate, and
other aspects, all beyond community's interests.
not only is prone to be abused, but implicitly invites ways of abusing
to community's life.

and generally (not saying anyone here personally) people demanding
special treatment because of some CoC rules and people enforcing
policing force of CoC in the name of political correctness, or for their
personal needs of being part of, or contributing to that policing force
may be more dangerous to community and other members than people who can
very occasionally unintentionally offend someone.

and does real harassment comes from unintentional offense? maybe, when
the victim feels too much offended to try to understand what really
happened.
and than CoC becomes a tool to revenge, even more so when CoC is to
punish offender, not really to mediate between involved parties. culture
differences do not help in understanding each other when it comes that
far.
misunderstanding (involuntary or intentional (yes, that may happen)) is
far more expected than intentional offense, that should be addressed and
not political correctness.

formalizing correctness is never good, helps nothing, introduces
problems. creating entity for judging and punishing does not solve those
newly introduced problems.

wouldn't it be better if CoC didn't touch aspects beyond community's
interests, only stated that friendliness is expected, some ways of
mediation available and punishment only as a last resort solution?

when technical community walks into keeping eyes on member's personal
beliefs, feelings and way of life (like being too much polite, too much
rude, too much humorous, too much fanatic, too much religious, or
whatever) than that's not the same technical community anymore.

just my 2c, ban me my dear community if i violated your CoC ;)

> Jim
>
> On June 5, 2018 11:49:06 AM EDT, Benjamin Scherrey
> <scherrey(at)proteus-tech(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 10:37 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
> wrote:
> It is of course possible that a member of the
> committee could act in
> bad faith for any number of reasons. You can say the
> same thing about
> any position of leadership or authority within the
> community, though.
> That hasn't really been much of a problem in my
> experience, and I see
> no reason for particular concern about it here.
>
>
> I thought the same thing as a member of the Django community.
> It adopted a CoC that I vocally warned was dangerous and far
> more likely to be abused than provide any benefit. I was
> shocked when the very first time it was ever invoked it was by
> one of the founders of the project (whom I previously
> personally respected) and it was absolutely used in the manner
> that I had feared which was to shut someone up whose opinion
> he did not like rather than any legitimate concern.
> Unfortunately this is not such an unusual circumstance as one
> might hope in these projects or conferences. It is impossible
> to separate the concept of political correctness from these
> CoCs I find and they are much more dangerous things than they
> appear. We should tread with extreme cautious about adopting
> such a thing.
>
>
> -- Ben Scherrey
>
>